goofball action film

Angelina Jolie returns as a distaff Indiana Jones in "Lara Croft Tomb
Raider: Cradle of Life," an action/adventure film (based on a video
game character) that is just goofy enough and inane enough to be almost
entertaining.

In this follow-up adventure - which is designed to give historians and
social studies teachers a severe case of the heebie-jeebies - Lara, the
world-famous archaeologist and adventurist, finds evidence that the
mythical Pandora's Box is really no myth at all, but rather an actual
object loaded with enough plague and pestilence to wipe the entire
human race off the face of the planet. It lies buried somewhere, hidden
by Alexander the Great in the 4th Century B.C. when he discovered how
virulent and deadly the contents of the box really were. Now,
twenty-four centuries later, Lara has to try and prevent an evil
billionaire capitalist from locating the container, prying open the
lid, and bringing an end to civilization as we know it.

Though the storyline is clearly not one to be conjured with, all that
really matters in a movie such as this one is that the action move
quickly and the stunts be sufficiently enterprising to engage the
audience. Credibility is the last prerequisite in a Lara Croft
adventure, as evidenced by the fact that if Lara isn't parachuting
smack dab onto the deck of a ship or into the passenger seat of a
moving jeep, she's hitching a ride on the back of a great white shark
and riding it to safety. Ah well, it's all in good fun, I suppose, and
Jolie not only looks stunning in all the outfits she's been given to
wear, but seems to be having a fine time playing along with the joke.

The ending is inevitably anticlimactic, but viewers can have a pretty
good time getting there at least.

Was the above review useful to you?

23 out of 35 people found the following review useful:

Why do so many people hate this movie?

Although Cradle of Life won't go down in movie history as an all-time
classic, I am mystified at why so many critics and moviegoers hated
it.

In my opinion, this movie is much better than the first Tomb Raider film.
The first film was entertaining, make no mistake, but it still had too much
of a comic book feel and 'Angelina Jolie' (qv) had not yet gotten a firm
grasp of the Lara Croft role. In Cradle of Life, both Lara and Jolie show
newfound maturation, and this makes her (both actress and fictional
character) much more interesting to watch. Heck, even Jolie's faux British
accent is more convincing the second time around. I was one of the many who
protested when she was cast in the role; the first film left be unconvinced,
but she finally won me over in her second outing.

The story is also more interesting in the second film, with the whole
Pandora's Box angle being something more worthy of Tomb Raider than the
tired old "conspiracy out to take over the world" plot of the first
film.

There are some aspects of the second film that I didn't care for as much.
Lara, for one thing, is far more deadlier this second time around and at one
point seriously considers gunning down a man in cold blood. This type of
behavior is more fitting for James Bond than Lady Lara Croft. But once I got
used to the idea of Lara Croft 007, I didn't mind it so much. (Indeed, if
Hollywood ever follows through with it's long-threatened female Bond film,
they could do far worse than get Angelina Jolie for the role of Jane(?)
Bond.)

What appealed to me in Cradle of Life is how familiar Lara, her background,
and her supporting characters have become with only one previous film under
their belts. No time is spent explaining who she is and why she lives in
such a huge mansion (which sadly appears only briefly). This level of
familiarity, of character comfort, is something I've only ever seen once
before -- in the Bond series.

Cradle of Life also features some most impressive set pieces that may not
necessarily advance the story, but are great to watch, such as a zoom in
from outer space on Lara riding a motorcycle, an incredible zoom-in shot
THROUGH the window of Croft Manor, and a great scene of Lara shooting at
targets while riding a horse -- sidesaddle!

Sadly, the critical and box office failure of Cradle of Life probably
guarantees no further entries in the series, and even if it does continue,
Jolie looks ready to follow Audrey Hepburn's lead and put acting on the back
burner in favor of humanitarian work so the role will probably go to another
(possibly less talented) actress. If this turns out to be the case, I
believe the Lara Croft series looks set to be remembered as fondly as the
Derek Flint films of the 1960s.

Anyone who has been scared away by the bad reviews could do worse than to
rent a copy from their local video store and check it out. You might be
surprised at how much fun the movie is.

Was the above review useful to you?

23 out of 38 people found the following review useful:

Pretty Good, If All You Want Is A Brainless Action Movie

Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life is an improvement over the
original as it delivers more action and adventure. Archaeologist and
explorer extraordinaire, Lara Croft, journeys to a temple which has
sunken underwater in search of lost treasures. During her expedition,
Croft happens upon a sphere that contains the mythical Pandora's Box,
only to have it stolen from her by Chen Lo, the leader of a Chinese
crime syndicate. Chen Lo is in league with a bad guy named Reiss, who
wants to use the priceless Box as a doomsday weapon. The plot sounds
okay but the main reason someone would see this film is for the action
scenes and Angelina Jolie. People just wanting those two things will
probably enjoy this film. People that want a good story and better
direction should skip this film. The action scenes are really cool and
are done well. However, the story is weak and the film doesn't quite
make sense at times either. I think the person that should be blamed is
Jan de Bont. He is a terrible director and can't build up suspense very
well. He did a bit better then Simon West but still the studio should
have hired someone else. The acting is good not great but nothing
horrible either. Angelina Jolie does a good job of playing Lara Croft
and she is also very breathtaking in the film. Gerard Butler does a
good job as well though sometimes his performance wasn't very
interesting. The action scenes are really cool and are done well.
Another problem I had with this film is that it gets boring at times.
Having a lot of action doesn't mean its audience will be entertained.
The movie's running time is 117 minutes which is a bit longer then the
original. I think they could have cut the film down to about the same
length as there some pointless scenes. If you hated the original then
you should skip this film as the film is more of the same but it is
more entertaining. As long as you don't try to notice too many of the
mistakes in the film then you should enjoy it. If your looking for a
serious action flick then just skip this. Rating 6.8/10

Was the above review useful to you?

33 out of 59 people found the following review useful:

Impressive stunts do not a movie make...

ANGELINA JOLIE makes the most of showing her prowess at performing
stunts that any male would envy, but the showcase for her physical
skills is hardly worthy of her presence. The script is as shallow as
the video game it is based on and no one has much of a chance to give
any depth to their characters.

As a result, even her co-star, hunky Gerard Butler with his Scottish
accent, has trouble registering more than a "go through the motions"
kind of performance. The chemistry between him and Jolie can only be
described as "icy". Not to worry. He later steamed up the screen two
years later with his Phantom role and a scorching "Point of No Return"
sequence that had his female fans gasping for breath. Here, I have to
report, he is sadly wasted, except for a couple of daring stunts that
he and Jolie perform well together.

Ciarin Hinds, as the villain, later joined Butler for PHANTOM OF THE
OPERA. He would have been more convincing here with the mustache he
assumed for his Phantom character. Something is missing in his evil
portrait. He just doesn't seem comfortable in the role.

Things keep moving, stunts every few minutes, explosions, gunfire,
jumping off tall buildings, dazzling neon explosions, all accompanied
by Alan Silvestri's booming soundtrack music. But in the end, all we
have left with is a stuntathon sort of thing that is pointless in
tracing the story of the search for Pandora's Box and the quest for an
orb. It's cliffhanger stuff for the mindless and that's about all.

Not worth two hours of viewing time and the ending is rather lame.

Was the above review useful to you?

58 out of 110 people found the following review useful:

Jan De Bont, thy name is wasted potential...

When I look at Jan De Bont's resumé, I think of all the brilliant Dutch
projects he has worked upon, and then I think of the films he has
directed in America. The gulf between the two is such that even the
less discerning can't help but be amazed. This is, after all, the guy
who worked alongside one of Holland's favourite sons, the legendary
Paul Verhoeven, on such indisputable triumphs as Turks Fruit or Flesh +
Blood. To call directing such dreck as Speed or Tomb Raider 2 a
comedown is a form of flattery.

Lara Croft, Tomb Raider: The Cradle Of Life, also proves one of a
certain critic's rules regarding appreciating film based on their
titles. The rule basically states that the longer the title is, the
worse the film will be. Just as RoboCop, clocking in at a mere seven
characters, is one of the greatest films the American film industry has
ever been blessed with, Tomb Raider 2's full title clocks in at a
whopping forty-two. Believe me, the quality level indicated by this
under the aforementioned rule is very much in force here.

A classic example of this film's idiocy is when Lara, bleeding from one
leg and stranded outside an underwater crypt, punches a shark in the
face before riding on his back and finding a quiet place to sleep out
on the ocean for an unspecified period. I'm no expert on sharks, but I
would have thought that the impediment to motion that being under
several hundred feet of water poses would make a punch in the face feel
to a shark what a light poke in the nose would feel to us under normal
circumstances. Not to mention the fact that, after lying out in such a
large body of water for so long with an open wound, at least another
shark is bound to come along sooner or later.

One area where Jan deserves credit is that I've never seen him resort
to the use of shaky-cam. Thankfully, directors of European origin saw
right through the party line that this puts the audience into the
action, and realized that it does nothing of the kind. As a result,
while many shots are too close for comfort during action sequences,
they are at least stable enough that one can make sense of the actors'
motions. The fight scene choreography is of such a quality that it
doesn't need to be hidden from the audience.

Angelina Jolie seems to have a lock on strong woman characters that are
so generic she can portray them all alike, yet she does this template
so well that at least this audience member fails to notice. The problem
here is that every character in this film is so generic that you cannot
help but notice. Jolie's acting is never that brilliant, but she looks
like Anna Paquin next to Gerard Butler. Noah Taylor is another classic
example of a reason why I am not surprised that Australian entertainers
rarely manage to get out of the isolation tank that is Australia.
Seriously, this guy could be reading a description of Angelina's naked
body and bore the hell out of me.

I gave Lara Croft: Tomb Raider: The Cradle Of Life a two out of ten.
Don't mistake this to mean that it is necessarily better than the films
I gave a one out of ten. When I give something a two out of ten, that
means its mediocrity makes it seem like a deliberate waste of a good
hundred million. Aside from Angelina Jolie in skin-tight lycra and a
clever twist ending, there ain't nothing to see here, folks.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

Pretty people in pretty places doing impossible things----

With tongue firmly in cheek, the story of this film is a series of
preposterous events, but what are we to expect of a game made into a
movie? Angelina Jolie is Lady Lara Croft, and is stunning in her skin
tight gray diving suit. Ciaran Hinds (Phantom Of The Opera) is the
villain, a scientist bent on getting his hands on the Pandora's box
containing the essence of all evil, in order to rule the world. Lara is
having none of that, and enlists her former partner Terry Sheridan
(Gerard Butler - The Phantom) to help find it and keep it away from
evil doers.

There are some wonderful set pieces throughout the film as with the
underwater temple; Lara arriving at the boat to start the expedition on
a jet ski (wowser!); the shark to the rescue (huh?); the sub to the
rescue (double huh?). More: at the Croft mansion the kung fu; the
sidesaddle horse riding while shooting at targets (wow!); at the prison
getting Terry released - her in her white fur amid all that filth;
Terry doing pull ups dripping sweat; Terry looking down from his bars
saying "Croft" in just the right way to let us know this is one
dangerous hombre. And his devastating comment to Lara "I AM Charming"
and isn't he just? The motorcycle race between Lara and Terry across
the great wall in China was fun. Him telling her "don't look at my ass"
as they climb a hill was cute and funny.

The famous sex scene is so reversed - she is the one in charge and he
ends up her prey and victim - is one for the books. Nice eye candy for
all of us out here in the real world.

That's the good stuff. There are some strange choices made by the
director (or whoever?) A wedding celebration on the edge of a precipice
to show the quake at the beginning? Lots of money for what purpose -
didn't add anything for me. The upside-down gunfight as Lara and Terry
escape once again. Sorry, the thrill is gone and it bombed.

Simon Chow is good and in his Hong Kong films a real menace - but here
was wasted. Croft running up the car shooting - a la Chow Yun Fat in
some of his 1980's films - is blatant 'borrowing.' All the shooting out
of glass in the office building - a la "Die Hard" - been there done
that.

AND!!! What is with the Shadow Guardians in the last fourth of film. We
go from sort of realism filtered through game playing mentality into
science fiction. Blech! Lame! Cinematography is gorgeous and some of
the sound track music is fine. Overall a more good than bad - 7/10

Angelina IS Lara Croft.

I have to say this was overall a great movie. The main reason I think this
might be because of my love to video-games, and I loved Resident Evil and
the first Tomb Raider movie too.

I wasn't really a fan when I saw the first movie, I'd never played a Tomb
Raider game before, but I decided to give it a go as it looked really
cool.

I went to the cinema to watch it and after that time I'm a big Tomb Raider
fan. The movie was great, in my opinion. So I looked forward to play the
games and wait for a sequel.

And here the sequel is. Lived up to most of my expectations. I've already
watched it twice on the cinema in one week, and I still love it.

The first "action" scene was a good start of the movie. The Luna Temple
collapsing and having bad guys shooting at you at the same time, was
interesting to see. And it didn't take long before next actionscene, which
never made this movie any boring.

I loved the humor and stunts too. There are many funny moments and stunts
I
remember well. Angeline is perfect as Lara Croft and I really hope they
will
make a Tomb Raider 3.

If I am to complain about something, it has to be about several things not
being explained enough. The meeting in the plane in the beginning of the
movie still leaves me with two questions. And some better character
developments wouldn't have hurt.

9/10

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 40 people found the following review useful:

Thankfully, No Third Is Planned

Considering "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider" was pretty good entertainment,
this sequel was a disappointment. Critics disagreed and liked this one
better, but I disagree with them. As with most sequels, it just
overdoes what was popular in the first film.

In this case, that means the action is WAY overdone (since it was too
much on the first film, to begin with); "Laura" becomes WAY too much of
a feminist-macho icon and Jolie's British accent here is so phony it's
embarrassing, and annoying to hear.

On he good side, I enjoyed the exotic locales (Far East and Africa), it
had very little profanity and some of the stunts were wild and fun to
watch. As far as I know, they don't have another sequel planned, which
is smart.

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 44 people found the following review useful:

Weakest Action Movie of the Summer

This second movie in the 'Tomb Raider' series was a disapointment for me. I
was not a great fan of the first one either. Certainly Angelina Jolie is as
sexy as you can get, but there is too little else in her character to make
her the female James Bond that the authors of the series want her to be.
Even the sentimental track in this second movie does not succeed to make her
more real. Director Jan de Bont succeeded much better with the original
story in 'Speed' or the reality-TV like effects in 'Twister'. In 'Tomb
Raider 2' he is just mixing a potion of James Bond with a little bit of
Indiana Jones, without too much of a result. If you did not see it yet, you
may as well wait for the DVD. 6/10 on my personal scale.